Skip to main content
Glama

mcp_opendaw_create_melody_from_progression

Generate a lead melody from a chord progression string, hitting chord tones on strong beats and passing tones on weak beats. Pick from patterns: chord_tones, sustained, syncopated, triadic, stepwise.

Instructions

Create a lead melody from a chord progression string.

Completes the harmonic quartet: create_chord_pads (sustained harmony) + create_arpeggiated_progression (arp movement) + create_bass_from_progression (bass foundation) + THIS (lead melody). All four take the same "Am-F-C-G" string.

The melody hits chord tones on strong beats (1, 3) and uses passing tones or neighbor tones on weak beats (2, 4) for melodic interest.

pattern: Melodic pattern: "chord_tones" — root/third/fifth on beats 1+3, passing tone on 2+4 "sustained" — one chord tone per bar, held for full bar (ballad) "syncopated" — 8th notes, chord tones on downbeats, passing on ups "triadic" — arpeggiated 8ths through chord tones (folk, country) "stepwise" — scale steps between chord tones (pop, classical)

bars_per_chord: Bars per chord (default 4). octave: MIDI octave for melody (5 = C5=72, typical lead range). velocity: Note velocity (0-1, default 0.75). track_index: Track for melody (typically melody track = 3).

Example:

Pop lead from I-V-vi-IV

create_melody_from_progression("C-G-Am-F", pattern="chord_tones", octave=5, track_index=3)

Ballad sustained melody

create_melody_from_progression("Am-F-C-G", pattern="sustained", octave=5, bars_per_chord=4)

Country triadic fiddle

create_melody_from_progression("D-G-A-D", pattern="triadic", octave=5, velocity=0.8)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
octaveNo
patternNochord_tones
velocityNo
start_beatNo
unit_indexNo
progressionNoAm-F-C-G
track_indexNo
bars_per_chordNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

The description discloses the musical generation behavior: chord tones on strong beats (1,3) and passing/neighbor tones on weak beats (2,4), plus detailed pattern definitions. However, it does not state whether the tool overwrites existing notes on track_index or adds to them, or whether a track must already exist, which would matter for a tool with no annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is front-loaded with the core purpose and then uses labeled sections for patterns, parameters, and examples. It is longer than necessary, but the bullet-style pattern list and three usage examples justify the length; minor redundancy exists in repeating beat/chord-tone rules.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For an 8-parameter tool with no annotations and an output schema, the description covers the main workflow, the chord-string format, pattern options, defaults, and examples. It fails to explain start_beat and unit_index, and says nothing about whether the operation is additive or destructive, but overall it gives an agent enough context to invoke the tool correctly for typical melody generation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The description provides detailed semantics for pattern (five named patterns with rhythmic definitions), bars_per_chord, octave (with C5=72 reference), velocity, and track_index, and it demonstrates progression via examples. It omits start_beat and unit_index, which are not described in the schema either, leaving a gap for those two parameters.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states 'Create a lead melody from a chord progression string' with a clear verb and resource. It also distinguishes itself from siblings by naming the 'harmonic quartet' and placing 'THIS (lead melody)' alongside three specific alternative tools.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It explicitly frames the tool as completing a harmonic quartet with create_chord_pads, create_arpeggiated_progression, and create_bass_from_progression, all sharing the same chord string format. This tells the agent when to use it: after building the other three parts. It also lists alternative pattern options with genre cues, providing practical selection guidance.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/ameobius-ai/opendaw-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server